Presenter: Benjamin Davies
Mentors: Azim Shariff and Bret Mercier, Psychology
Poster: 16
Major: PsychologyÂ
Past research has found that some individuals make moral decisions based on rules (deontologists) while others make moral decisions based a deliberative cost benefit analysis of outcomes (utilitarian). Deontologists tend to perceive moral decisions, which break a societal rule (i.e. killing a person), as immoral even when that prevents the most harm. In this study, we tested whether people will make more deontological moral decisions when they know their responses will be visible to others (compared to when responses are anonymous). Undergraduate participants (n=75) completed a worksheet assessing their perceptions of different utilitarian moral decisions. We informed participants that their answers would either be read by another participant (visible condition) or anonymous (anonymous condition). Contrary to our predictions, participants in the visible condition did not make different moral decisions than those in the anonymous condition. In the second part of the study, participants were given the same moral decision questions, ostensibly completed by another participant, and asked to judge the other participant’s personality. Participants perceived those who made deontological decisions as more moral, trustworthy, warm, and caring, but also as less efficient.